When will Elijah the prophet appear in the world?

[zeke37]

Interpreter,

Thanks for your comments.

According to the words of Christ during the Last Supper, the kingdom of God here on earth came at the latest on resurrection day.

does that mean that the Kingdom of heaven comes at His Coming, at the last day?

Jesus said that He would not drink of the fruit of the vine again until He did so with them in His Father's kingdom, which He drank on the cross.

huh? He drank with them on the cross?
u don't mean vinegar do you?

He also said He would not partake of a Passover meal again until it was fulfilled in the kingdom. He ate day-four of the Passover meal with them on resurrection day in the upper room.

what? He did not eat the Passover meal.
He died on the cross before that supper ever began.
the Last Supper was the Preparation day meal, the night before the Passover.

the last supper was not the Passover meal

I see no reason to think that the kingdom took another 300 years to be established, when Christ clearly communicated by His actions after the Last Supper that it was established within the week of His crucifixion.

imo your facts are askew

 

[swainkas]

does that mean that the Kingdom of heaven comes at His Coming, at the last day?


huh? He drank with them on the cross?
u don't mean vinegar do you?


what? He did not eat the Passover meal.
He died on the cross before that supper ever began.
the Last Supper was the Preparation day meal, the night before the Passover.

the last supper was not the Passover meal


imo your facts are askew

u don't mean vinegar do you?:

Yes I do. Vinegar is a product of grape (at least in the Mediterranean area), the "fruit of the vine." Jesus did not say He would drink wine with them again, just fruit of the vine. He did just that on the cross. And He did it deliberately by asking for something to drink. Look at what John wrote about the incident.

After this, Jesus, knowing that all things had already been accomplished, to fulfill the Scripture, said, “​

​

​

​

I am thirsty.” A jar full of sour wine [vinegar (KJV)] was standing there; so they put a sponge full of the sour wine upon a branch of hyssop and brought it up to His mouth. Therefore when Jesus had received the sour wine, He said, “It is finished!” And He bowed His head and gave up His spirit.​

John 19:28-30

what? He did not eat the Passover meal.
He died on the cross before that supper ever began.
the Last Supper was the Preparation day meal, the night before the Passover.

the last supper was not the Passover meal

I will not argue with you whether the Last Supper was on Passover, I'll let you argue that with Luke the Gospel writer. This is what he wrote on the topic. You're right, John's account suggests that it was held on the day before Passover.

Then came the first day of Unleavened Bread on which the Passover lamb had to be sacrificed. And Jesus sent Peter and John, saying, “Go and prepare the Passover for us, so that we may eat it.” Luke 22:7-8

To further prove that the Last Supper was on the first day of Passover, I will quote Jesus that night who said:

“I have earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer; for I say to you, I shall never again eat it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.” Luke 22:15-16

The Passover is a seven day event, most-clearly described as such in Ezekiel 45:21, where it reads: “the Passover, a feast of seven days.” So anything Jesus eats in the next six (or seven days if you prefer) after the Last Supper is a Passover meal. On resurrection Sunday (three days into the seven day Passover), Jesus asks for something to eat as documented in Luke 24:41-43:

While they still could not believe it because of their joy and amazement, He said to them, “Have you anything here to eat?” They gave Him a piece of a broiled fish; and He took it and ate it before them.

This is clearly within that six or seven day window. He thus is eating a Passover meal with them again and thus clearly communicating that the kingdom He came and died for is here and now.

I'm pretty sure I have my facts straight on this one.

 

[Bible2]

precepts said in post 636:

So who is the 11th horn in Dan 7:11?

Just as in Daniel 7:17, the 4 "kings" were 4 kingdoms/empires, the Roman empire being the 4th "kingdom" (Daniel 7:23), and just as the two "horns" in Daniel 8:3 which Alexander the Great himself broke in Daniel 8:7 were the two kingdoms of the Medes and the Persians (i.e. the Medo-Persian empire) (Cyrus and Darius themselves had already been dead for about 200 and 150 years, respectively, by the time of Alexander's conquest), and just as the 4 horns in Daniel 8:8 were 4 "kingdoms" (Daniel 8:22), so in Daniel 7:24 the 10 horns/"kings" can be 10 major kingdoms/nations which currently exist, and which arose into prominence from the territory of the Roman empire. "And another shall rise after them" (Daniel 7:24) can refer to the country of Lebanon, from which the Antichrist could arise and bring to prominence on the world stage. The Antichrist could come from Lebanon's city of Tyre (Ezekiel 28:2; 2 Thessalonians 2:4).

That is, in Daniel 7 the first 3 beasts (Daniel 7:3-6) represent the ancient empires of Babylon (lion), Medo-Persia (bear), and Greece (leopard). And the 4th beast, or 4th "king"/"kingdom" (Daniel 7:17,23), represents the ancient Roman Empire. And the 10 horns/kings which come out of it (Daniel 7:7,24) could represent 10 major kingdoms/nations today which came out the former territory of the Roman Empire, which consisted not only of Western Europe, but also the Middle East and North Africa. These 10 nations could be Germany, the U.K., France, Italy, Spain, Turkey, Egypt, Iraq, Algeria, and Syria. The 10 part-iron/part-clay toes of Daniel 2:42 could represent the same thing as the 10 horns of Daniel 7:7. The Europeans could be the iron, and the Arabs and Turks could be the clay. In Daniel 2:43, the inability of the iron to mix with the clay could represent how, for example, there are many Turks living in Germany, but they remain separated in ghettoes within German cities. Similarly, there are many Algerians living in France, but they remain separated in ghettoes within French cities.

But despite this social separation, which could endure indefinitely, the people of Western Europe on the one hand, and the people of the Middle East and North Africa on the other, could still one day put aside their political separation and become united into one confederation. For Daniel 2:42 refers to the 10 as a singular "kingdom". The person who brings this about could be the Antichrist. The arising of the "little" horn (Daniel 7:8, Daniel 8:9), which is "diverse" from the 10 major nations (Daniel 7:24), could mean that the Antichrist will arise from a little country.

And the little horn arising from "among" the 10 major nations (Daniel 7:8) could mean that the Antichrist's country's territory used to be part of the Roman Empire. And before that, it was part of one of the 4 Diadochian Greek kingdoms which succeeded the Greek Empire of Alexander the Great (Daniel 8:8-9,21-25). The territory of these 4 kingdoms stretched from Greece over to Iran, and down into Egypt. So the Antichrist could come from the Middle East. He could be an Arab who will come from the little country of Lebanon, from the modern city of Tyre (Ezekiel 28:2; 2 Thessalonians 2:4).

The Antichrist could start out by claiming to be a Baathist. After becoming the leader of Lebanon, he could peacefully gain control of a Baathist confederation of 3 of the 10 major nations (Daniel 7:24): Egypt, "toward the south" of Lebanon (Daniel 8:9), and Iraq and Syria, "toward the east" of Lebanon (Daniel 8:9). This confederation could also include the minor nation of a United Palestine, i.e. a defeated Israel, "the pleasant land" (Daniel 8:9).

This Baathist confederation could be put together in the future by an Iraqi Baathist General who could completely defeat and occupy Israel and Egypt with a huge Iraqi Army (Daniel 11:15-17; in verse 17 the original Hebrew word translated as "daughter" is "bath"), but who could then mysteriously disappear (Daniel 11:19) shortly before the Antichrist arises on the world stage (Daniel 11:21-45). Years later, when the Antichrist gains control of all 10 of the major nations, he could appoint kings over them (Revelation 17:12) who will defer to him (Revelation 17:13), like when Napoleon gained control of different nations, he appointed kings over them who would defer to him.

 

[Bible2]

swainkas said in post 640:

You cite Zechariah 14:3-5 as a future event. I contend it is a past tense event.

Zechariah 14 is about Jesus' (never fulfilled) 2nd coming with all his saints (Zechariah 14:5b; 1 Thessalonians 3:13b), and about the subsequent millennium, when he will reign on the earth from Jerusalem (Zechariah 14:8-21, Micah 4:1-4). Zechariah 14:3 refers to the 2nd-coming battle of Revelation 19:19-21. And Zechariah 14:4 shows that at his 2nd coming, Jesus will physically land on the Mount of Olives, just as at the end of his first coming, he physically ascended from the Mount of Olives. Acts 1:11-12 says that Jesus will return in like manner as he left.

Before Jesus returns, at the very end of the future tribulation of Revelation chapters 6 to 18 and Matthew 24 the world's armies will gather together at a staging area at Armageddon (Revelation 16:14,16) (Har Megiddo, Mount Megiddo in northern Israel). They will then move south and pillage Jerusalem right before Jesus returns and defeats them (Zechariah 14:2-5, Revelation 19:19-21). Jesus will then remain on the earth as King (Zechariah 14:9), and the unsaved people left alive on the earth (Matthew 24:40) will be forced to come up to Jerusalem and worship him annually (Zechariah 14:16-19). Jesus and the bodily resurrected church will rule the unsaved survivors of the nations with a rod of iron during the millennium (Revelation 2:26-29, Revelation 5:10, Revelation 20:4-6).

swainkas said in post 640:

So this prophecy, some five hundred years before Christ was fulfilled in the fact that the LORD's feet, God's, i.e., Jesus' feet would stand on that mount, which they did when Jesus' feet stood on that mountain, see Luke 22:39.

Note that Zechariah 14 wasn't fulfilled at Jesus' first coming, because Jesus' first coming wasn't the day of the Lord (Zechariah 14:1), for that won't begin until his 2nd coming (1 Corinthians 1:7-8; 2 Thessalonians 2:1-2). Also, Jesus' first coming didn't occur right after Jerusalem had been defeated by all nations gathered against it (Zechariah 14:2-5). Also, at his first coming, Jesus didn't fight the nations (Zechariah 14:3) and then land on the Mount of Olives (Zechariah 14:4). It will be at his 2nd coming that Jesus will fight the nations (Revelation 19:11-21) and then land on the Mount of Olives, just as he had ascended from the Mount of Olives at the end of his first coming (Acts 1:11-12).

Also, at his first coming, Jesus didn't split the Mount of Olives in two (Zechariah 14:4), creating a valley through which the Jews in Jerusalem could flee from Jerusalem (Zechariah 14:5) as Jesus waged war against all the nations of the world which had just pillaged Jerusalem (Zechariah 14:2-5). Also, at Jesus' first coming, he didn't come with all the saints (Zechariah 14:5b). That will happen only at his 2nd coming (1 Thessalonians 3:13b). Also, at Jesus' first coming, he didn't make it so that Jerusalem was light at night (Zechariah 14:6-7). And he didn't make water flow out from Jerusalem in summer and winter, half of the water flowing toward the Dead Sea and the other half toward the Mediterranean (Zechariah 14:8). And he didn't make himself King over the earth (Zechariah 14:9). And he didn't flatten the topography for miles around Jerusalem and raise its elevation (Zechariah 14:10). And he didn't make it so that Jerusalem wouldn't be destroyed (Zechariah 14:11). And he didn't send an amazingly rapid, flesh-eating plague against the armies which had just pillaged Jerusalem, so that their flesh consumed away while they stood on their feet (Zechariah 14:12).

Also, at his first coming, Jesus didn't cause the armies which had just pillaged Jerusalem to fight against each other (Zechariah 14:13). And he didn't make Judah fight at Jerusalem and win for itself the wealth of all the nations surrounding it (Zechariah 14:14). And he didn't make the transportation animals used by the armies which had just pillaged Jerusalem suffer the horrible flesh-eating plague (Zechariah 14:15,12). And unsaved survivors of all nations which had just pillaged Jerusalem didn't come to Jerusalem annually at the Feast of Tabernacles to worship Jesus (Zechariah 14:16). And he didn't send drought and plague against the nations which refused to come to Jerusalem to worship him (Zechariah 14:17-19).

Also, at his first coming, Jesus didn't make Jerusalem so holy that even the bells on the horses in Jerusalem had the words "Holiness Unto The Lord" engraved on them (Zechariah 14:20). And he didn't make it so that the animal-sacrifice boiling pots in the temple in Jerusalem became as holy as the bowls before the altar (Zechariah 14:20). And didn't make it so that every pot in Jerusalem and Judah became holiness to the Lord (Zechariah 14:21). Instead, at his first coming, Jesus left unbelieving Jerusalem spiritually desolate (Luke 13:35). Also, at his first coming, Jesus didn't make it so that there would be no more Canaanites in the temple in Jerusalem (Zechariah 14:21).

 

[precepts]

precepts said in post 636:
So who is the 11th horn in Dan 7:11?

Just as in Daniel 7:17, the 4 "kings" were 4 kingdoms/empires, the Roman empire being the 4th "kingdom" (Daniel 7:23), and just as the two "horns" in Daniel 8:3 which Alexander the Great himself broke in Daniel 8:7 were the two kingdoms of the Medes and the Persians (i.e. the Medo-Persian empire) (Cyrus and Darius themselves had already been dead for about 200 and 150 years, respectively, by the time of Alexander's conquest), and just as the 4 horns in Daniel 8:8 were 4 "kingdoms" (Daniel 8:22), so in Daniel 7:24 the 10 horns/"kings" can be 10 major kingdoms/nations which currently exist, and which arose into prominence from the territory of the Roman empire. "And another shall rise after them" (Daniel 7:24) can refer to the country of Lebanon, from which the Antichrist could arise and bring to prominence on the world stage. The Antichrist could come from Lebanon's city of Tyre (Ezekiel 28:2; 2 Thessalonians 2:4).

Why do you keep dodging the facts? We've been thru this before.




This is where you're quoting me from, from my very last post:

posted by precepts in his last post:

precepts said in post 621:

The antichrist is cast into the lake of fire with the false prophet, Rev 19:20.

That's right.

So who is the 11th horn in Dan 7:11?

posted by precepts in his last post:

The beast which comes up out of the earth (Revelation 13:11-16) represents the individual man who will become the Antichrist's False Prophet (Revelation 19:20, Revelation 16:13).

The 11th horn in Dan 7:11, right?

Why did you ignore this question to repeat the same foolish answer of the 11th horn being a kindom?

In Dan 7:11, who's given to the flame?

That is, in Daniel 7 the first 3 beasts (Daniel 7:3-6) represent the ancient empires of Babylon (lion), Medo-Persia (bear), and Greece (leopard). And the 4th beast, or 4th "king"/"kingdom" (Daniel 7:17,23), represents the ancient Roman Empire.

How many times have I asked you to name the four kings of these four kingdoms? Name the four kings, and explain who is the 11th horn that's given to the flame (the lake of fire) in Dan 7:11, please.






Facts you continue to ignore:
(1) Dan 7's 4th beast with the ten horns is the 1st beast in Rev 13 with ten horns.

(2) They both represent Rome.

(3) The 11th horn that comes up after the ten horns in Dan 7 is the 2nd beast in Rev 13, the false prophet.

(4) Dan 7:11 is Rev 19:20, the Beast/the antichrist and the false prophet being thrown into the lake of fire.

(5) The Beast/antichrist has to be the 8th horn among Dan 7's ten horn beast because the false prophet is the 11th horn, the 2nd beast in Rev 13.

(6) The ten kings in Rev 17:12 has to be the ten horns in Dan 7's 4th ten horned beast because the beast/antichrist and the false prophet are the 8th and 11th horns, and there's no life after the 11th horn and the 8th horn are cast into the lake of fire in Dan 7:11.

(7a) The ten horns of Dan 7's 4th ten horned beast has to be the the 1st beast in Rev 13's 7 headed 10 horned beast.

(7b) The ten horns are the same ten horns on each beast because they represent Rome and her first ten kings.

(8) The fourth beast in Dan 7's king is the first king of Rome, Augustus Caesar



Checkmate!

 

[Anto9us]

Antiochus Epiphanes

 

[precepts]

Antiochus III, the Great!

 

[Interplanner]

B2, I appreciate your thoroughtness. I wish it was about the 2500 uses of the OT by the NT. Instead you go with it (OT) direct. Jesus raised his "temple" (greater than a temple) on the 3rd day and it has all those "features."

 

[heavenlessstar]

Is Elijah here yet?

 

[YeShallTread]

Is Elijah here yet?

Yes, for all the prophets and the law....is Elias!

Matthew 11:13-15 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John. And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear

​

I share with you your "location" of salvation for your loved one.

 

[ebedmelech]

Is Elijah here yet?

Indeed Elijah (Elias) has come and gone on! He was John the Baptist, and Jesus made that very clear in Matthew 11:11-15:
11 Truly I say to you, among those born of women there has not arisen anyone greater than John the Baptist! Yet the one who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.
12 From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffers violence, and violent men take it by force.
13 For all the prophets and the Law prophesied until John.
14 And if you are willing to accept it, John himself is Elijah who was to come.
15 He who has ears to hear, let him hear.

This is why the OP (Jon Anon), has no longer posted! His erroneous conclusions, have hopefully sent him back to the scriptures to get it right...and perhaps he will.

 

[YeShallTread]

Indeed Elijah (Elias) has come and gone on! He was John the Baptist, and Jesus made that very clear in Matthew 11:11-15:
11 Truly I say to you, among those born of women there has not arisen anyone greater than John the Baptist! Yet the one who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.
12 From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffers violence, and violent men take it by force.
13 For all the prophets and the Law prophesied until John.
14 And if you are willing to accept it, John himself is Elijah who was to come.
15 He who has ears to hear, let him hear.

This is why the OP (Jon Anon), has no longer posted! His erroneous conclusions, have hopefully sent him back to the scriptures to get it right...and perhaps he will.

You have reached an erroneous conclusion due to your bogus translation. Please see:


Matthew 11:13-15 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John. And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.


John 1:21-23 And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No. Then said they unto him, Who art thou? that we may give an answer to them that sent us. What sayest thou of thyself? He said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord, as said the prophet Esaias.

 

[Interplanner]

Ye,
Mt 11 is Jesus speaking about John. Jn 1 is the public asking John. There is nothing mistaken about translations. It is a question of who is speaking about whom?

 

[YeShallTread]

Ye,
Mt 11 is Jesus speaking about John. Jn 1 is the public asking John. There is nothing mistaken about translations. It is a question of who is speaking about whom?

If ye will receive it.... all the prophets and the law..... this is Elias

John, as he himself stated, was the voice of ONE of those coming in the spirit of Elias.

The translation used, NASB is greatly mistaken!

 

[ebedmelech]

You have reached an erroneous conclusion due to your bogus translation. Please see:


Matthew 11:13-15 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John. And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.


John 1:21-23 And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No. Then said they unto him, Who art thou? that we may give an answer to them that sent us. What sayest thou of thyself? He said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord, as said the prophet Esaias.

What pretty bogus is the "way" you're reading scripture.

Now...let's walk through it, beginning with God saying He would send Elijah, which is Malachi 4:5, 6:
5 “Behold, I am going to send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and terrible day of the Lord.
6 He will restore the hearts of the fathers to their children and the hearts of the children to their fathers, so that I will not come and smite the land with a curse.”

How are we to understand this without allowing scripture to interpret it for us?

It cannot be done the way you're doing it because using John 1:21-23, which is a time before Jesus speaks at Matthew 11:13-15...and that is your error.

When John the Baptist birth is announced to Zacharias, this is what Gabriel said to him at Luke 1:16, 17:
16 And he will turn many of the sons of Israel back to the Lord their God.
17 It is he who will go as a forerunner before Him in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers back to the children, and the disobedient to the attitude of the righteous, so as to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.”

Do you notice Gabriel quoting form Malachi but also saying John comes in the "spirit and power" of Elijah?

When you allow scripture to interpret...you will get the answer, so let's do that:

When you use what John answers to the Pharisees...that is NOT an answer you can use in this context because we already know before John was born, that God's mission for him was to come in "the spirit and power of Elijah". That takes precedence over how John answered the Pharisees, because John answered correctly. He is not Elijah, (for the purpose of what THEY were asking Him)...however, for the purpose of God's mission for him, he is Elijah!

Going forward in this time, we come to Jesus educating the disciples in the ways of God in Matthew 11:11-15, which again, reinforces:

1. What God said in Malachi 4:5, 6

2. What Gabriel said to Zacharias in Luke 1:16, 17

So now...you are faced with the fact that God and Gabriel says John is Elijah...but John says he's not. Then we have Jesus also saying that John was Elijah, so now what do you do?

You understand that John is doing his mission, but he doesn't see as God sees it, so why would He say he's Elijah? Despite that fact, God has sent him as a "type of Elijah".

That is the point you missed!

 

[YeShallTread]

What pretty bogus is the "way" you're reading scripture.

Now...let's walk through it, beginning with God saying He would send Elijah, which is Malachi 4:5, 6:
5 “Behold, I am going to send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and terrible day of the Lord.
6 He will restore the hearts of the fathers to their children and the hearts of the children to their fathers, so that I will not come and smite the land with a curse.”

How are we to understand this without allowing scripture to interpret it for us?

It cannot be done the way you're doing it because using John 1:21-23, which is a time before Jesus speaks at Matthew 11:13-15...and that is your error.

When John the Baptist birth is announced to Zacharias, this is what Gabriel said to him at Luke 1:16, 17:
16 And he will turn many of the sons of Israel back to the Lord their God.
17 It is he who will go as a forerunner before Him in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers back to the children, and the disobedient to the attitude of the righteous, so as to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.”

Do you notice Gabriel quoting form Malachi but also saying John comes in the "spirit and power" of Elijah?

When you allow scripture to interpret...you will get the answer, so let's do that:

When you use what John answers to the Pharisees...that is NOT an answer you can use in this context because we already know before John was born, that God's mission for him was to come in "the spirit and power of Elijah". That takes precedence over how John answered the Pharisees, because John answered correctly. He is not Elijah, (for the purpose of what THEY were asking Him)...however, for the purpose of God's mission for him, he is Elijah!

Going forward in this time, we come to Jesus educating the disciples in the ways of God in Matthew 11:11-15, which again, reinforces:

1. What God said in Malachi 4:5, 6

2. What Gabriel said to Zacharias in Luke 1:16, 17

So now...you are faced with the fact that God and Gabriel says John is Elijah...but John says he's not. Then we have Jesus also saying that John was Elijah, so now what do you do?

You understand that John is doing his mission, but he doesn't see as God sees it, so why would He say he's Elijah? Despite that fact, God has sent him as a "type of Elijah".

That is the point you missed!

I didn't miss the point...I think you did. Please read my reply to Interplanner again.

 

[ebedmelech]

I didn't miss the point...I think you did. Please read my reply to Interplanner again.

If you think so. "the translation argument" wont work when you access Greek resources. The NASB is point on in the translation.

Now...you can continue thinking the NASB is wrong but when you compare translations, this is what you find:

KJV
13 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.
14 And if you are willing to receive it, he is Elijah who is to come.
15 He who has ears to hear, let him hear!

NASB
13 For all the prophets and the Law prophesied until John.
14 And if you are willing to accept it, John himself is Elijah who was to come.
15 He who has ears to hear, let him hear.

NIV
13 For all the Prophets and the Law prophesied until John.
14 And if you are willing to accept it, he is the Elijah who was to come.
15 Whoever has ears, let them hear.

Young's Literal Translation
13 for all the prophets and the law till John did prophesy,
14 and if ye are willing to receive [it], he is Elijah who was about to come;
15 he who is having ears to hear -- let him hear.

Complete Jewish Bible
13 For all the prophets and the Torah prophesied until Yochanan.
14 Indeed, if you are willing to accept it, he is Eliyahu, whose coming was predicted.
15 If you have ears, then hear!

There's virtually no difference in how the passage is translated, just in the phraseology...and all of those are satisfactory. All the NASB does, is make it easier, by inserting "John himself"...which John is the pronoun "he" in the other translations, since he (John) is the subject.

John was a type of Elijah, and God chose in the Malachi prophesy to call him Elijah.

You can chose to think there's a difference...but there isn't.

 

[Interplanner]

Yesh,
LOL. The reply was even worse than the original for clarity.

Let's have complete statements or nothing, please.

 

[YeShallTread]

Sorry...wrong button

 

[YeShallTread]

Yesh,
LOL. The reply was even worse than the original for clarity.

Let's have complete statements or nothing, please.

His words are clear:

The NASB mistakenly shows that "John himself is Elijah" which leads one to see John as The Elijah who came. As if the event is fulfilled and he was that prophesied one.

John himself tells us he was NOT Elijah. How do you reconcile this?

John is "one voice" crying in the wilderness...one of many. John is one of those coming in the spirit of Elijah who comes in a continuing process.

Who is Elijah/Elias who was to come...."If ye will receive it.... all the prophets and the law..... this is Elias."


I repeat....the identity of Elias is given us by Christ for he is:

Matthew 11:13-15 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John. And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.
​